Floor Statements

Madam President, earlier this week, some Republicans--I think the Republican Study Committee, 170 House Members--released their plans for governing next year. Here are some of the things on their healthcare wish list: ending Medicare as we know it, which would drive up costs and threaten care for seniors; trying again--I think we are now on 50 attempts--to gut the Affordable Care Act, leaving tens of millions of Americans without coverage overnight and punishing people with preexisting conditions; and banning abortions, IVF, and contraception in every single State through bills ``designed to advance the cause of life.''

If budgets are statements of a party's value, then Republicans are making no secret of theirs: less access to quality healthcare and less control over their personal health.

And there is no reason not to take them at their word, other than that, if we take them at their word, you sort of sound like you are exaggerating. That is the problem. It is that what they are proposing is so outlandish, that it sounds like, you know, a Democrat and someone who wants my point of view to win the day. It sounds like I am exaggerating their point of view.

I actually had to read this stuff from the Republican study group, and they are way out of the mainstream--way out of the mainstream. Again, there is no reason not to take them at their word because, in Congress and in Statehouses across the country, Republicans say what they want to do, and then they do it. It doesn't matter how cruel these policies are, how unpopular their positions are. They have not been able to show any restraint whatsoever when it comes to enacting this extreme agenda.

And it is extreme. Millions of Americans are left to endure the disastrous consequences of this crusade every day. If Republicans have their way, millions of people will lose their healthcare. Seniors and people with preexisting conditions will be forced to pay outrageous out-of-pocket costs, just to get lifesaving procedures and medications. And young people will be kicked off of their parents' plan immediately. And women across the country will be forced to carry doomed pregnancies to term. Families trying to start a family

will have one less option, at least, with IVF not even available to them.

This is not what we should be fighting for. We have to work to get more people covered, because high-quality, low-cost healthcare should not be a luxury available to some, and, frankly--and I believe this-- there is going to be a point where we don't fight about healthcare anymore. There is going to be a point at which Republicans realize that taking away people's healthcare, taking away people's autonomy as it relates to their own bodies, is just an electoral loser.

We are getting there on Obamacare. I thought we had kind of gotten there after multiple attempts to repeal it, but here they are again, trying to start that effort again.

Democrats are focusing on lowering premium and drug prescription costs so getting healthcare doesn't bankrupt people. And even the Republicans in Washington and across the country, as they try to control women by dismantling reproductive freedoms, Democrats are fighting to codify Roe into Federal law.

Democrats have done more than just give speeches about healthcare. We have actually delivered. It was 14 years ago that we passed the Affordable Care Act, which has since helped more than 40 million Americans get their coverage and has improved health outcomes for so many people: women, children, seniors, people with disabilities, people in rural communities.

And so it is no wonder that, more than a decade later, the ACA continues to grow in popularity and is setting new records every year for enrollment. Why? Because people actually like having healthcare. Republicans, Democrats, Independents, voters, not voters--everybody basically thinks that we should have a system that treats you humanely if you are sick.

But it hasn't stopped Republicans from trying again and again to repeal it, through Supreme Court cases, Executive orders, and legislation. They have failed every time.

Meanwhile, Democrats continue to build on the ACA's progress, including recently with the Inflation Reduction Act and the American Rescue Plan, because there are now tax credits and other measures in those bills that enable millions of Americans to save, on average, $800 a year on premiums. And the number of uninsured is at an alltime low. The number of uninsured is at an alltime low, and the reason for that is legislation that fortunately passed. But we, unfortunately, did not have a single Republican vote for the Affordable Care Act, for the American Rescue Plan, or for the Inflation Reduction Act.

For the first time ever, people with Medicare are paying less for insulin, which is now capped at $35, and saving money on a whole range of other prescription drugs. This is what progress looks like.

But there are still millions of Americans, especially in the middle class, who don't get coverage through work but make too much to qualify for subsidies, and they deserve coverage too. The State Public Option Act, which I am reintroducing today with colleagues in the Senate and House, would help to bridge that gap. It helps to provide a public option to anyone who wants health insurance by allowing States to create a Medicaid buy-in program that is not based on income.

State public-option programs have shown to lower costs, increase consumers' choice in plans, and improve equity in coverage. Several States--including Maine, Minnesota, and New Mexico--are already exploring creating exactly this kind of buy-in approach. The State Public Option Act would help other States to follow suit.

The bottom line is this: Healthcare is a necessity and not a luxury, and it shouldn't be something the political parties argue about. In the richest country in human history, having it should not depend on your job or your economic status. It ought to be available, accessible, and affordable to everybody. The vast majority of Americans agree, but there is only one party today fighting to make it a reality.

Madam President, earlier this week, some Republicans--I think the Republican Study Committee, 170 House Members--released their plans for governing next year. Here are some of the things on their healthcare wish list: ending Medicare as we know it, which would drive up costs and threaten care for seniors; trying again--I think we are now on 50 attempts--to gut the Affordable Care Act, leaving tens of millions of Americans without coverage overnight and punishing people with preexisting conditions; and banning abortions, IVF, and contraception in every single State through bills ``designed to advance the cause of life.''

If budgets are statements of a party's value, then Republicans are making no secret of theirs: less access to quality healthcare and less control over their personal health.

And there is no reason not to take them at their word, other than that, if we take them at their word, you sort of sound like you are exaggerating. That is the problem. It is that what they are proposing is so outlandish, that it sounds like, you know, a Democrat and someone who wants my point of view to win the day. It sounds like I am exaggerating their point of view.

I actually had to read this stuff from the Republican study group, and they are way out of the mainstream--way out of the mainstream. Again, there is no reason not to take them at their word because, in Congress and in Statehouses across the country, Republicans say what they want to do, and then they do it. It doesn't matter how cruel these policies are, how unpopular their positions are. They have not been able to show any restraint whatsoever when it comes to enacting this extreme agenda.

And it is extreme. Millions of Americans are left to endure the disastrous consequences of this crusade every day. If Republicans have their way, millions of people will lose their healthcare. Seniors and people with preexisting conditions will be forced to pay outrageous out-of-pocket costs, just to get lifesaving procedures and medications. And young people will be kicked off of their parents' plan immediately. And women across the country will be forced to carry doomed pregnancies to term. Families trying to start a family

will have one less option, at least, with IVF not even available to them.

This is not what we should be fighting for. We have to work to get more people covered, because high-quality, low-cost healthcare should not be a luxury available to some, and, frankly--and I believe this-- there is going to be a point where we don't fight about healthcare anymore. There is going to be a point at which Republicans realize that taking away people's healthcare, taking away people's autonomy as it relates to their own bodies, is just an electoral loser.

We are getting there on Obamacare. I thought we had kind of gotten there after multiple attempts to repeal it, but here they are again, trying to start that effort again.

Democrats are focusing on lowering premium and drug prescription costs so getting healthcare doesn't bankrupt people. And even the Republicans in Washington and across the country, as they try to control women by dismantling reproductive freedoms, Democrats are fighting to codify Roe into Federal law.

Democrats have done more than just give speeches about healthcare. We have actually delivered. It was 14 years ago that we passed the Affordable Care Act, which has since helped more than 40 million Americans get their coverage and has improved health outcomes for so many people: women, children, seniors, people with disabilities, people in rural communities.

And so it is no wonder that, more than a decade later, the ACA continues to grow in popularity and is setting new records every year for enrollment. Why? Because people actually like having healthcare. Republicans, Democrats, Independents, voters, not voters--everybody basically thinks that we should have a system that treats you humanely if you are sick.

But it hasn't stopped Republicans from trying again and again to repeal it, through Supreme Court cases, Executive orders, and legislation. They have failed every time.

Meanwhile, Democrats continue to build on the ACA's progress, including recently with the Inflation Reduction Act and the American Rescue Plan, because there are now tax credits and other measures in those bills that enable millions of Americans to save, on average, $800 a year on premiums. And the number of uninsured is at an alltime low. The number of uninsured is at an alltime low, and the reason for that is legislation that fortunately passed. But we, unfortunately, did not have a single Republican vote for the Affordable Care Act, for the American Rescue Plan, or for the Inflation Reduction Act.

For the first time ever, people with Medicare are paying less for insulin, which is now capped at $35, and saving money on a whole range of other prescription drugs. This is what progress looks like.

But there are still millions of Americans, especially in the middle class, who don't get coverage through work but make too much to qualify for subsidies, and they deserve coverage too. The State Public Option Act, which I am reintroducing today with colleagues in the Senate and House, would help to bridge that gap. It helps to provide a public option to anyone who wants health insurance by allowing States to create a Medicaid buy-in program that is not based on income.

State public-option programs have shown to lower costs, increase consumers' choice in plans, and improve equity in coverage. Several States--including Maine, Minnesota, and New Mexico--are already exploring creating exactly this kind of buy-in approach. The State Public Option Act would help other States to follow suit.

The bottom line is this: Healthcare is a necessity and not a luxury, and it shouldn't be something the political parties argue about. In the richest country in human history, having it should not depend on your job or your economic status. It ought to be available, accessible, and affordable to everybody. The vast majority of Americans agree, but there is only one party today fighting to make it a reality.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the scheduled vote occur immediately.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, Congress is failing disaster survivors across the country right now. Whether in Lahaina or in Burlington, survivors are not getting the full support of the Federal Government because Congress has yet to provide funding for long-term disaster recovery needs. That is in spite of the fact that, every passing month, more and more communities are being struck by extreme weather and need help in the rebuilding process.

It was more than 4 months ago that President Biden requested $2.8 billion for the Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Program, or CDBG-DR.

CDBG-DR funding is a lifeline for families and businesses that are trying to recover from disasters, helping them to get back on their feet faster and more fully. Yet the spending package that Congress passed 2 weeks ago did not include a dime in new funding for CDBG-DR, despite the efforts of myself and my colleagues--including the Presiding Officer--on both sides of the aisle from disaster-affected States.

Supporting disaster survivors has never been and should never be a partisan issue, nor can it be buried at the bottom of a long list of Federal priorities. It is one of our most core responsibilities, as the Federal Government, to show up for Americans in their hour of need, when the State and local governments are overwhelmed. We have a chance to do that by including CDBG-DR funding in the appropriations package that we will be voting on later this week.

People on Maui and in every other disaster-struck community are counting on us for support, and it can't be that the Federal Government leaves them high and dry, midway through the process of putting their lives back together, because we couldn't get some numbers to add up. That is unacceptable, and we need to pass this funding now.

I object.

Mr. President, women and families across the country are confronting impossible choices because of Republican extremism on abortion.

Do you risk your own health with a high-risk pregnancy or do you risk being thrown in jail for trying to get an abortion? Do you stay in a State that forces you to carry for months a nonviable pregnancy to term? Do you travel hundreds of miles in secret to get access to a legal abortion in some other jurisdiction?

If these choices sound awful, it is because they are.

The chaos and the suffering created by Republicans is not just limited to red States. These attacks affect everyone.

Take Hawaii, which legalized abortion over 50 years ago and has some of the strongest protections in the country. Yet there is a case before the Supreme Court right now trying to prevent people from accessing medication abortion by telehealth. That means, if you live on an island like Kauai and rely on telehealth to get reproductive care, you would have to take off work and get on a plane to access services.

So, if you are in a blue State, thinking ``I am safe,'' you are not. Republicans are coming after all of it, and no one and nothing is off limits. Attacks on abortion threaten the entire system of reproductive care, including things like contraception, family planning programs, and early miscarriage care. Hospitals and doctors are terrified of providing care that will cost them their licenses or land them in jail.

For instance, if you are an OB/GYN in a State like Texas, you might be forced to delay or deny treatment to a patient with an ectopic pregnancy because there is enough gray area that the State can arbitrarily decide that you broke the law and punish you for providing lifesaving care. Doctors are not lawyers, and many in these States are understandably either retiring early or quitting or moving to a State that doesn't make criminals out of them simply for doing their jobs.

I am joined here in the Gallery today by an OB/GYN resident from Hawaii, Dr. Olivia Manayan. Born and raised in Honolulu, Dr. Manayan is currently a chief resident at the University of Hawaii, and next year, she will begin her specialization in complex family planning--focusing on abortion training, complex contraception, and reproductive justice. We need more people like Dr. Manayan, not fewer--people who are passionate about providing accessible and equitable care to their communities. We ought to be celebrating their contributions, but, instead, Republicans are hard at work criminalizing the whole profession.

Republicans are coming after all of it, and they are not going to stop. They have said what they are going to do, and now they are doing it. I think the challenge for those of us on this side of the aisle is that what they are doing is so bananas; it is so offensive; it is so cruel; it is so unpopular that, when we describe it accurately, it sounds like we are being hyperpartisan and freaking out for no reason. That is what it sounds like--I grant you that--but it is literally what is happening: IVF, banned. Contraception, not sure. Ectopic pregnancy, you have got to carry that to term. A nonviable pregnancy, you have to carry that to term and prove that it is nonviable even if your doctor says it is nonviable.

The cruelty knows no end. So, if you are a person who thinks, ``Hey, you know, I am kind of uncomfortable with abortion, and so maybe I think I am pro-life,'' I want you to understand what it means to be pro-life in the context of this 50-year fight to eliminate women's control over their own bodies. They are not stopping at Roe. They are not stopping at IVF. They are not stopping at contraception. They are not stopping. They want to control people's bodies.

Stopping all of this means fighting with as much coordination and passion as the anti-abortion movement has been doing for decades. And that includes men too. This can't solely be a women's issue. We don't get to sit this one out. These extreme policies affect everybody and everyone wishing to start a family or caring for someone who is pregnant, and so we all need to get involved.

When and if we have the House and the Senate and the Presidency, we should enshrine all of these reproductive freedoms in Federal statutory law.

Mr. President, the Senate will soon vote--how soon, unclear--but soon vote on an appropriations package which, among other bills, includes one from the Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development Subcommittee, which I chair. I want to take a moment to talk about what is in it and why it matters so much.

The United States is experiencing an unprecedented housing shortage.

Homes are increasingly out of reach for so many families and individuals, and homelessness continues to rise to record levels. There is no question that the Federal Government must act.

No appropriations bill--especially one negotiated under difficult spending caps demanded by House Republicans--is going to solve our decades-long housing problem. But what this bill does is provide funding for rental and homelessness assistance for millions of Americans.

It also provides $100 million for the Yes in My Backyard Program, which will incentivize building housing and eliminating exclusionary zoning policies that have long kept housing supply down.

The bill also includes funding to modernize transportation and make it safer and more accessible. It fully funds the Federal Aviation Administration so that it can staff up and maintain a world-class air traffic control system.

Also included is the funding for the Federal Railroad Administration, which, in part, will help to improve rail safety in the wake of the East Palestine train derailment.

Crucially, the bill provides vital funding to improve Tribal housing and transportation infrastructure, including more than $1.3 billion for the NAHASDA Native-American Housing Block Grant Program. That is a record increase for Tribal housing of more than $300 million, which will help Tribes, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians build affordable housing in their communities and address their unique and urgent housing needs.

As always, these bills are the product of a lot of hard work and patience, especially from our excellent staff. That has been particularly true this year. They have worked so hard--long, long hours. When we make a deal, the work begins. Whenever we decide that we have consummated our deal, they don't get to say: Look, I am in the middle of a kid's baseball game or I am at a doctor's appointment or I am on a run or I just woke up. They have to get to work and draft the legislation. So lots of them have spent a lot of sleepless nights. My staff, the Republican staff on the T-HUD Committee, our House counterparts, all of the people in leadership on both teams, everybody worked their butt off to make this possible. I just want to appreciate them.

I also want to take a moment to thank Ranking Member Cindy Hyde- Smith, the subcommittee members, as well as our counterparts in the House--Representatives Cole and Quigley--who worked in good faith throughout the process to get us here.

There is a lot more that we need to do to invest in housing and transportation around the country, but this bill funds enormously important priorities and projects that so many Americans rely upon. It is essential that we pass it, along with the rest of the bills.

We have a deadline of tomorrow night at midnight. I am confident that we will make that deadline, but we have got to run this thing across the finish line.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, before I begin my remarks, in the Hawaii Legislature, there was a common custom to ask the presiding officer that the previous speaker's remarks were adopted

as if they were my own. And although I didn't listen to the entirety--I am not prepared to do that because I only got the back end--I just wanted to commend the senior Senator from Massachusetts for her moral clarity about the conduct of the war in Israel and the fact that it is a strategic and moral failure, and that the Prime Minister of Israel must be held to account for the fact that so many people are suffering so unnecessarily.

Mr. President, overturning Roe v. Wade, as outrageous and devastating as it was, was never going to be the end for Republicans. They knew that, and we knew that because they weren't exactly keeping it a secret.

Except there was a set of sort of center-right and even center-left Republicans and pundits who swore privately that it wouldn't open the floodgates to an even greater assault on women's reproductive freedoms. They scoffed at even the possibility of the very kinds of outcomes that we are seeing playing out across the country today--like last week, when the Alabama Supreme Court effectively banned IVF and left people who are trying to start a family with nowhere to turn.

It turns out people were right to be worried, and one of the worst infirmities in this town is that somehow--somehow--you are considered savvy, thoughtful, a centrist, an institutionalist if you never, ever freak out.

``Everything is going to be fine.''

Everything is always going to be fine. He is not going to try to overturn the results of this election. They are not going to go through with overturning Roe v. Wade. Every savvy person at every cocktail hour that I don't attend is always telling us to chill out.

But now it is happening. They went through with it. They repealed Roe, and all of the worst-case scenarios from all of the organizations that pushed for reproductive freedom were deemed right.

I still remember the great Senator from the State of Colorado who made as an emphasis in his reelection campaign women's reproductive freedom. Do you know what everybody called him on the Republican side? Not Mark Udall--Mark Uterus. They thought that was hilarious. Look at this weird focus on women's reproductive freedoms. And he sat there and said: But look, if the Supreme Court changes hands, then Roe is in peril.

Everyone was told to chill out. They made fun of this U.S. Senator for predicting the future.

People were right to be worried. Extreme Republicans are going after women and reproductive freedoms through every way that they can--in Congress, in statehouses, in the Supreme Court, and in State courts.

Gutting Roe was never going to be enough; it was a gateway to all-out war. Right now, millions of women in America are paying the price. They are terrified of what they can and cannot do and what may or may not land them in prison. It is not a crime to start a family, but now it is. It is not a crime to dispose of a nonviable embryo in a lab, but Republicans have made sure that it is a crime.

Do you know how hard it is to do IVF? Everybody who is at least my age knows somebody who had a struggle getting pregnant, and that thing is emotionally and physically and financially exhausting. I have never thought of IVF through a partisan lens. I honestly hadn't. It didn't occur to me that they were going to go after people actually trying to get pregnant.

This is not about babies and life and families. This is about punishing women. This is about taking away their autonomy. This is their objective.

You know, 5 years ago, you might have come to me, and if I had made this kind of speech, you would have been like: Whoa, that is a little much, buddy. They are not going to do that.

They did that. They are still doing that. Republicans in Congress were quick to dismiss it. They even got a memo from their campaign committee to distance themselves from the very policies that they enabled for literally decades. They will try to on the one hand say they are for IVF but on the floor block legislation to enable IVF, and support fetal personhood legislation and block bills to protect IVF federally. They did it yesterday. So no one is fooled.

I know--and the Senator from Connecticut and I have been talking about this--sometimes it is very difficult to see through the fog on policy. On this one, it is not unclear who did what and what they are in the middle of doing. There is nothing pro-life about ripping away the only options available for someone trying to have a kid. There is nothing pro-life about jeopardizing a woman's life by forcing her to carry a nonviable pregnancy to term. That is not a principled belief; that is insanity. It is actively harming an innocent person.

In the wake of last week's decision, fertility clinics in Alabama are abruptly pulling the plug on IVF treatments because they are afraid of being prosecuted. That is leaving people wondering if they will be able to have a kid or not.

Not only can they not go through the process in Alabama, they can't even move their embryos because they are afraid of getting in legal trouble. They can't even move their embryos, right? Like, this was supposed to be--in the most optimistic scenario as well, laboratories of democracy, States can do whatever they want. You can't even take your own embryos and move them to another place where IVF is legal. Say you are a couple in Birmingham close to completing the IVF process. Suddenly, you can't continue it in your home State, and you don't have the ability to finish it somewhere else either. Overnight, these patients are left without options, with no notice and no recourse.

The human implications of the Alabama Supreme Court decision are as obvious as they are devastating, but it is also important to be crystal clear about how we got here politically, because this decision is not an anomaly. It is not a fringe view held by a few whacky judges in a single State. It is the direct result of a decades-long, organized, national effort by Republican hardliners to dismantle reproductive freedoms that were, until recently, the law of the land. They have shown zero restraint in going after people's rights, and there is no reason to believe that they are going to stop anytime soon. They will not. They did this, and they want more, and they have a plan. This is on them. This record is theirs to own.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, there is no good reason to delay the security and humanitarian assistance in this national security supplemental package any longer.

Ukraine is running dangerously low on munitions on the eve of the second anniversary of Putin's invasion; millions of innocent Palestinians in Gaza are suffering daily without access to basic necessities; and our allies in the Indo-Pacific are counting on our support to counter China's aggression and maintain stability in the region.

None of these priorities can wait months longer without being addressed. All of them are vital to our security interests. We need to pass this supplemental urgently.

When Ukrainian officials warn that they are running out of shells and bullets, it is not an exaggeration. In the fight for an eastern Ukrainian city, the ratio of Russian to Ukrainian artillery fire was 5 to 1--5 to 1. Ukrainian soldiers are being forced to ration their bullets even when enemy soldiers are bearing down on them. That is what Ukraine is contending with on the frontlines as we speak.

Meanwhile, Putin is intensifying his onslaught with the help of Iran and North Korea which are more than happy to replenish his stockpiles if it means ending world order as we know it. In Gaza, millions of innocent civilians have been, for months, enduring unimaginable horrors on a daily basis.

More than 28,000 people have been killed since the start of the war. Hundreds of thousands are starving with widespread famine looming. Just about everyone is displaced with nowhere else to go, and humanitarian assistance getting through the few available checkpoints is nowhere close to enough. These people need our help, and it can't arrive soon enough.

Just as we have a responsibility to help Israel defend itself against Hamas terrorism, we also have a responsibility to make sure that innocent Palestinians caught in the crossfire have access to basic necessities--food, water, medical supplies.

This package also includes important assistance for our allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific region in order to counter China's aggression in the region. Chinese President Xi has made no secret of his desire to take Taiwan by force if need be.

And just because there are wars going on in the Middle East and Europe, it does not mean that we can take our eye off threats brewing in Asia and the Indo-Pacific. It is in both our interest and our allies' interest for us to stay vigilant and provide support to maintain stability in the region.

Later this week, I will be part of a bipartisan delegation with 14 of my colleagues attending the Munich Security

Conference in Germany. And one of the pressing questions among world leaders will be: Where does America really stand? Do we still believe in defending democracy and freedom? Are we still willing to rally the world in standing up to autocrats and authoritarianism?

They will no doubt be closely watching what we do or fail to do here in the next few days. And we ought to be able to say to them: America remains the indispensable Nation. America stands with our allies in war and in peace. But that depends on Republicans working with Democrats in good faith to pass this supplemental package.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, for centuries, Native people have had everything stolen from them--their lands, their water, their language, their children.

It wasn't that long ago it was the official policy of the U.S. Government to terminate--to terminate--the existence of Tribes and to forcibly assimilate their citizens. And a big part of that unrelenting, inhumane policy was that the remains of Native ancestors and culturally significant items were also taken from them, not with permission, but by force; not discovered, but stolen on battlefields and in cemeteries, under the cover of darkness or under guise of academic research.

Think about that. The U.S. Government literally stole bones. Soldiers and agents overturned graves and took whatever they could find. And these were not isolated incidents. They happened all across the country. In my home State of Hawaii, the remains of Native Hawaiians-- or ``iwi kupuna,'' as they are called--were routinely pillaged without regard for the sanctity of burials or Native Hawaiian culture.

All of it was brought to some of the most venerable institutions at home and abroad to be studied like biological specimens, displayed in museum exhibits as if they are paintings on loan or squirreled away in a professor's office closet never to be seen again.

The theft of hundreds of thousands of remains and items over generations was unconscionable in and of itself, but the legacy of that cruelty continues to this very day because these museums and universities continue to hold onto these sacred items in violation of everything that is right and moral and, more importantly, in violation of Federal law.

To remedy this injustice, Congress passed the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, or NAGPRA, in 1990. It required museums and universities to quickly return the remains and the items that they were holding that belonged to Native Hawaiians, Alaska Natives, and American Indians.

At the time, the Congressional Budget Office anticipated that it would take about 5 years to complete the process of repatriation. Thirty-four years later, it is nowhere close to being done. In fact, experts recently estimated that at the current rate, it may take up to 70 more years to complete the process. Why? Because these institutions, all otherwise well-respected and sought after, have done everything in their power to obstruct and obfuscate when confronted about their collections.

They act as if this is some sort of impossible task, either administratively or determining the lineage or providence of an item. They purposefully mischaracterize items as ``culturally unidentifiable.'' Culturally unidentifiable.

They engage with Native communities as little as possible. They ``borrow'' collections from one another so they can never actually be held responsible for them. And maybe the most outrageous of all excuses, they claim that Tribes and Native groups lack the ability to take care of their own things--lack the ability to take care of their own items of cultural patrimony, bones stolen from graves.

This smells of the worst kind of colonialism, with a thin veneer of progressive ideology and verbiage. University provosts and presidents can do all of the land acknowledgements that they want. They can post lengthy statements about equity on their websites and champion any number of progressive causes, but that rings hollow when they are at the same time clinging onto vast collections of stolen items because of a perverse, patronizing sense of ownership.

This is not morally ambiguous. There is nothing to ponder here. The fact is these items do not belong in museums or universities or to science or academia. They belong to the Native people from which they came, which is why the Committee on Indian Affairs, where I am chair, held an oversight hearing on this issue almost 2 years ago and demanded explanations from the foremost offenders about their delays in repatriating these items.

They are located all over the country: Ohio History Connection; the Illinois State Museum; Harvard University; University of California, Berkeley; and Indiana University. Together, these five institutions still hold at least 30,000 Native ancestral remains. These institutions have been responsive, and many have accelerated their repatriation efforts since.

Earlier this month, Harvard, which has the third largest collection of these items in the country, pledged to cover the travel expenses of Native leaders to facilitate the repatriation process. Other museums, including the American Museum of Natural History and the Field Museum, have recently announced steps to finally comply with the Federal law. And yet there are still more than 70 other institutions holding almost 58,000 ancestral remains. That is not counting the additional hundreds of thousands of cultural items in their collections.

These museums and universities are everywhere: the University of Tennessee; the University of Kentucky; the University of Alabama; the University of Arizona; the University of Florida; the University of Missouri, Columbia; the University of Oklahoma; the Center for American Archaeology in Illinois; the University of Texas at Austin; the Milwaukee Public Museum; and so on. This is just a small sample, and I will enter the full list into the Record.

But the point is this: We are not done. Our work is not over. These are

supposedly liberal institutions who have no problem parroting whatever progressive expression is in vogue. And yet at the same time, they continue a colonial project against the explicit and repeated wishes of Native people. If you say you are for equal justice, for doing right by people of all backgrounds, then act like it. Return these remains and items to the Native people they belonged to all along.

Some of the challenges when it comes to addressing past injustices in American history can seem so big as to be totally overwhelming. Where do you start? But this is not one of them. Returning these items matters, and the good news is it is imminently doable, but doable only if we collectively agree that getting this right is a necessary condition for justice to be restored.

Doing this alone will not right past wrongs or somehow erase a long and brutal history of injustice. Of course, it won't. Native people still need money for water and electricity and healthcare. They still, as ever, need the unimpeded right to self-determination. But the least we can do--and I mean that, the least we can do--is enable them to tell their own stories and to define themselves, for themselves, to the rest of the world.

Give the items back. Comply with Federal law. Hurry. Devote resources to this. Demonstrate in three dimensions that you care about the values that you espouse.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the list of institutions in possession of the repatriated remains be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Madam President, I have two requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.

Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: